Polar Bears More Important Than Western Civilizationby Randall H. NunnJune 17, 2008Category:Political

N SUNDAY, AN article from the Associated Press stated that, less than a month after declaring polar bears a threatened species, "the Bush administration is giving oil companies permission to annoy and potentially harm them in pursuit of oil and natural gas." As far the Associated Press (and indeed, all of the mainstream media) is concerned, the survival of Western Civilization in the face of confiscatory pricing by the world's dictatorships is of small concern compared to the very real threat of annoyance to polar bears. Is it any wonder that readership of the mainstream press is falling?

Years ago we might have chuckled at reading such a silly article and shaken our heads in comical disbelief. Today, it is clear beyond doubt that the mainstream media seeks to stage a coup by imposing their beliefs and values on the citizens of this country through incessant propagandizing and opinion shaping. A press that writes every article with a preordained agenda and bias against individual liberties can be very dangerous if its audience does not recognize the propaganda for what it is.

Many of us thought that the mainstream media would muffle their harsh criticism of anything conservative or supportive of traditional values after the 2004 elections. Instead, the press has launched even more vigorous attacks, sensing the inability of the current administration to articulate any coherent positions on key issues or to boldly advance conservative policies. There has been a vacuum at the top in the current administration and the left has rushed in to occupy the empty ground.

Does the mainstream media understand the ultimate impact that lack of oil can have on our country and Western Civilization? Of course they do. They care more about advancing their socialist agenda in this country than they do about the economic strength and survival of the country. A sad-and frightening-state of affairs.

Let us suppose, for a moment, that the United States could secure its economic future for decades by tapping the oil that exists in Alaska, but that to do so it must obliterate the polar bear population in Alaska. If we could prevent the economic collapse of this country by proceeding to extract the oil without regard to the consequences to polar bears, should we do it? There is no question that the answer from the mainstream media and the environmentalist movement would be a resounding "No!" And there is no question that the majority of Americans, if faced with such a scenario would advocate moving forward now to drill for oil and gas.

With the survival of our airlines in question and the very real possibility of further shocks to our financial, housing and retail sectors, it is time for Americans to ignore the mainstream media and focus on electing only those representatives to Congress who will opt for survival of this country over protection of "threatened" species against "annoyance" by those seeking to insure that free American citizens can continue to travel to work and keep the economy alive and healthy.

One of the sad footnotes to all of this is that it was President Bush's Secretary of Interior who approved putting polar bears on the list of "threatened" species, despite the evidence to the contrary. No doubt Secretary Kempthorne will be toasted by the opinion molders and cocktail party crowd as a caring and enlightened public servant. To me, he is just another bureaucrat seeking approval and adulation from those who have consistently opposed the administration of which he is a part. President Bush could have exercised his executive prerogatives to stop this action but why should he start now?

Our politicians are little more than over-compensated panderers to public opinion as defined by the glitterati of the left. Of course, the "public opinion" has been shaped and manufactured by the mainstream media and its accomplices, but few in Congress have the intelligence to understand the magnitude of the psychological warfare being waged against us or the have the courage to oppose it.

We should be thankful that there were no polar bears at Yorktown and that freedom was more important than the many annoyances that had to be suffered to secure the blessings of freedom for all of us. But Washington knew that the protection of free men threatened by government oppression and tyranny must take precedence over "annoyance" to beasts of the wild. History remembers Washington as the "father of his country". History will remember Secretary Kempthorne and this administration as the protectors of polar bears from annoyanceÅif it remembers them at all.

---Randall H. Nunn†is a Staff Writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. (www.thenma.org).